From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 24 04:24:44 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBB3E16A4CF for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 04:24:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA6243D1F for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 04:24:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) i9O4OAq68425; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:24:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Danny MacMillan" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:24:10 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 In-Reply-To: <20041023074515.GB920@procyon.nekulturny.org> cc: Nell Weems cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: [OT] Sapir-Whorfian Advertising Clause (was Advertising clause in license) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 04:24:45 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Danny MacMillan > Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 12:45 AM > > Be that as it may, the term "advertising clause" seems strictly > definitive, as it pertains to a clause that refers to advertising. > That much at least seems obvious from what Nell fgrep'd for. I > don't disagree with the substance of your point, but it is counter- > productive to redefine language to suit one's political agenda. > No it is not. People find it productive to redefine language to suit their political agenda all the time. The original term out of the license was not "advertising clause". The original term, right out of the license, was "acknowledgement" The GPL crowd found themselves sounding like a bunch of ungrateful spoiled brats when they originally tried telling people the BSD license was bad because it "had a clause that required you to acknowledge the copyright holders" So, they did a bit of creative doublespeak and came up with the slur "advertising clause" Since advertising is associated with commercial activities, this carried an instant negative connotation in the free software community. The GPL bigots didn't even have to explain what an advertising clause was, the mere presense of the word "advertising" was enough to set people against the acknowledgement clause. Notice how just changing the term back to the real term "acknowledgement clause" removes the negative connotation and lets the truth of what it really is show through? You are very naieve if you think that words and phrases don't carry negative connotations, or by chance are you in the habit of using terms like "nigger", Danny boy? The very name FreeBSD was defined to suit a political agenda. While you may not like living in a world that uses language as a weapon, that's the kind of world most people live in, and you better get used to operating in it. Ted